A new state in Europe? Scenarios for Catalan self-determination

Historically, the political structure of Spain has been a source of conflict: peripheral regions as Catalonia and the Basque country have questioned the centralized power of the state and have claimed a higher level of decentralization in view of their distinct history, cultural identity and language. Recently, political and social discontent has escalated in Catalonia, leading to the unilateral announcement of a Catalan self-determination referendum for November 2014. Regardless of political or ethical preferences, it will be necessary to foresee the consequences of this process for Catalonia, Spain and elsewhere. A scenario approach focuses on possible outcomes of the current debate rather than on the arguments put forward in the controversy. Those in favour of Catalan independence have depicted a future for their country with a booming economy that will situate it at currently unattainable levels of prosperity. Opponents of secession argue that Catalonia will become a failed state. These future visions of an independent Catalonia can be described as scenarios, the underlying assumptions and plausibility of which can be analysed. EU membership and the effect of borders on international trade are identified as key variables. The alternative scenarios will also be crucial to evaluate the broader impact of “a new state in Europe”.

Article published in Futures, Volume 64, December 2014, Pages 51–60.
doi:10.1016/j.futures.2014.10.008.

Link: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0016328714001694.

The Sharing Economy: a Sign of the Times, but What Sign?

One of the effects of the social internet and of mobile connectivity is that it creates a constant communication between supply and demand side. Not only can we shop 24/7, but we can also trade goods and services with other individuals, allowing us to share possessions and help others. What are the social origins of this wave of altruism, and where will it lead to?

Airbnb, Uber, but also leaving a dog with a host while you are on holiday, renting a bike or buying an apple pie from your neighbour: the internet has streamlined these interactions so that we now can use our resources more efficiently, we do no longer have to be obsessed with possessions and we can help our neighbours (for even more examples, see Forbes). In short, the sharing economy has unexpectedly put an end to the evil side of capitalism. So now, will we live happily ever after?

In his column "Don't believe the hype, the 'sharing economy' masks a failing economy", Evgeny Morozov gives a critical analysis of the phenomenon that, as the author states, has turned us into "perpetual hustlers": the rapid rise of the sharing economy is caused by "capitalism's newly found technological capability to convert every commodity that has been bought and removed from the market – temporarily becoming 'dead capital' of sorts – into a rentable object that never leaves the market at all." While the internet does help to more effectively distribute existing resources, and for many of us the trading system may alleviate the effects of the financial crisis, the sharing economy fights the symptoms, but not the disease.

According to Morozov: "Sensors, smartphones, apps: these are our generation's earplugs. That we no longer notice how thoroughly they banish anything that even smacks of politics from our lives is itself a telling sign: deafness – to injustice and inequality but, above all, to our own dire state of affairs – is the price we'll pay for this dose of immediate comfort".

Read the whole article Evgeny Morozov, "Don't believe the hype, the 'sharing economy' masks a failing economy", The Observer, 28 September 2014.

(Originally posted on the ETFI blog, http://etfi.eu/blog/2014/10/220604-the-sharing-economy-a-sign-of-the-times-but-what-sign).

The disadvantage of peace and harmony (a Christmas thought)

I am color blind, but I did not discover that myself. You only know when other people tell you they see colors that you don't. It is the same as being stupid: you don't understand the things you cannot understand, so others have to tell you.

This principle shows why we have to rely on other opinions to understand the flaws of our system. As far as I am able to see, this is an important ideological problem of our contemporary world. Without alternative perspectives, we will be unable to see what happens, if it is rooted in our system.

The rational allocation of resources dogma

What would be the right price for a house? One of the most visible symptoms of the current crisis is the oversupply in housing. Demand is stable: housing is a basic necessity, and being evicted can drive people to suicide (2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9 and counting). This means that prices would have to drop to the level where buyers step in. They do not.

We do not have a mechanism that rationally measures the value of a house.